The asymmetric war of the Global South “squeezes” the West

A global asymmetric war is in full swing. There are many state and non-state actors who are the protagonists – not long ago unknown to the international public opinion – and are making guerrilla moves on the world chessboard in order to sideline the western liberal order based on rules (rules based order) led by the USA.

And its vanguard is the Yemeni resistance movement Ansarallah, which is expressed by the group of Houthis. The Ansarallah movement or better known as Houthi is absolutely relentless. They shot down a $30 million MQ-9 Reaper drone with just a $10,000 domestic missile.

They are the first in the Global South to ever use anti-ship ballistic missiles against merchant and US naval vessels linked to and/or protecting Israel.

For all practical purposes, Ansarallah is at war with the US Navy. Ansarallah seized one of the US Navy’s highly sophisticated autonomous underwater vehicles (AUVs), the $1.3 million Remus, a torpedo-shaped underwater drone capable of carrying a massive payload and moving via sensors.

All of the above – a 21st-century retelling of the Ho Chi Minh Trail during the Vietnam War – suggests that the Hegemon (ie, the US) may not even qualify as a paper tiger, but rather a paper leech.

Lula, the Gaza Genocide and the Global South

Israel’s ongoing genocide in Gaza – prompts a real leader of the Global South, Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva to call it quits.

Lula spoke for Brazil, Latin America, Africa, the BRICS and the vast majority of the Global South when he defined the tragedy of Gaza for what it is: genocide.

No wonder Israel’s allies across the Global North – plus its vassals in the Global South – raised a storm of protest over this statement. The genocides in Tel Aviv declared Lula persona non grata in Israel.

However, Lula did not kill 29,000 Palestinians – the vast majority of whom were women and children. History will be unforgiving: it is the genocides that will ultimately judge someone as personae non grata for all of humanity. What Lula said represented the BRICS in practice: this was obviously cleared up before with Moscow, Beijing, Tehran and, of course, the African Union.

Lula spoke in Addis Ababa and Ethiopia is now a member of the BRICS 10.

The majority in the G20

Brazil’s President cleverly wanted his genocide statement on the table during the G20 Foreign Ministers meeting in Rio. Far beyond the BRICS what is happening in Gaza is a convergence among the G20’s non-Western partners – who are in fact the majority.

No one, however, should expect any serious continuity within a divided G20 group. Yemen’s struggle for the “people” of Gaza is a matter of humanitarian, moral and religious solidarity – these are fundamental principles of the rising Eastern “cultural” powers, both domestically and in international affairs.

This convergence of principles has now created a direct link – with an extension to the moral and spiritual sphere – between the Axis of Resistance in West Asia and the Slavic Axis of Resistance in Donbass.

Great attention should be paid to the timing. The forces of the Donetsk People’s Republic (DPR) and Russia have spent two years of hard fighting in Novorossiya only to reach the stage where it is becoming clear – based on the battlefield and cumulative data on the ground – that “negotiations” mean determining the terms of delivery of Kiev.

In contrast, the work of the Axis of Resistance in West Asia has not even begun. It is fair to argue that its power and full dominance have yet to develop (think Hezbollah and Iran).

Hezbollah Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah hinted that there is actually nothing to negotiate about Palestine. And if there was a return to any borders, it would be the borders of 1948. The Axis of Resistance understands that Israel’s entire Plan is illegal and immoral.

But the question remains, how will they throw it, in practice, into the waste bin of History? Possible – admittedly optimistic – scenarios to follow would involve Hezbollah seizing the Galilee as a step towards the eventual recapture of the Israeli-held Golan Heights.

However, the fact remains that even a united Palestine lacks the military capacity to recapture the stolen Palestinian lands. So the questions posed by the vast majority of the Global South standing by Lula might be:

  • Who else, besides Nasrallah, Hezbollah, Hashd al-Shaabi, will join the Axis of Asymmetric War in the fight for Palestine?
  • Who would be willing to come to the Holy Land and die? (After all, in Donbass, only Russians and Russian-speakers are dying for historical Russian lands).
  • And this brings us to the endgame: only a West Asian Special Military Operation (SMO) will, in the bitter end, settle the Palestinian tragedy.
  • A translation of what is happening throughout the Slavic Resistance Axis: “Those who refuse to negotiate with Lavrov will find themselves in the hands of Shoigu.”

The menu, the table and the guests

US Secretary of State Tony Blinken spoke truths when he actually defined the much-loved “rules-based liberal international order”: “If you’re not at the table, you’re on the menu.”

Following his own hegemonic logic, it is clear that Russia and the US/NATO are on the table, while Ukraine is on the menu.

What about the Red Sea? The Houthis defending Palestine against US-UK-Israel are clearly on the table, while Western vassals supporting Israel from the sea are clearly on the menu.

And that’s the problem: the Rulers – or “the crusaders” – have lost the power to place the name cards on the table.

The main reason for the collapse of this principle is the holding of serious international meetings sponsored by the Russia-China strategic partnership in the last two years since the inception of the SMO. It’s all about step-by-step planning and clearly defined long-term goals. Only states with their own cultural values can do this – not the plutocratic states of capitalism.

Negotiation with the Hegemon (USA) is impossible because he himself prevents negotiations (see serial blocking of cease-fire resolutions at the UN). Furthermore, the Ruler excels at instrumentalizing his client elites across the Global South through threats or pressures to compromise: see the hysterical reaction of the Brazilian media to Lula’s verdict on what is happening in Gaza.

What Russia is showing the Global South, two years after the launch of the Special Military ΄Operation, is that the only way to teach the Ruler a lesson is to be kinetic or “military-technical”.

The problem is that no nation-state can compare to nuclear/ultrasonic/military superpower Russia, in which 7.5% of the budget is devoted to defense production. Russia is and will remain in permanent state of war until the Hegemon elites come to their senses – and that may never happen.

Meanwhile, the West Asian Axis of Resistance is watching and learning, day by day. It is always important to bear in mind that for all resistance movements in the Global South – and this includes, for example, West Africans against French colonialism – the geopolitical rifts could not be sharper.

A cultural world war

The conflicts are many: collective West against Islam, collective West against Russia. and sooner or later, a significant part of the West, even reluctantly, against China. The fact is that we are already immersed in a World War that is both existential and cultural.

As we stand at the crossroads, there is a dichotomy: either escalation to overt “mobile military action”, or proliferation of Hybrid Wars across many latitudes.

So it is up to the Axis of Asymmetry, cool, calm and collected, to forge the underground corridors, passages and paths capable of undermining and subverting the US-led, unipolar, rules-based liberal international order.

About the author

The Liberal Globe is an independent online magazine that provides carefully selected varieties of stories. Our authoritative insight opinions, analyses, researches are reflected in the sections which are both thematic and geographical. We do not attach ourselves to any political party. Our political agenda is liberal in the classical sense. We continue to advocate bold policies in favour of individual freedoms, even if that means we must oppose the will and the majority view, even if these positions that we express may be unpleasant and unbearable for the majority.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *